SB 387

Bill Subjects

Abstract

Existing law, the State Bar Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of attorneys by the State Bar of California, a public corporation. The State Bar is governed by a board of trustees. Existing law authorizes the board, among other duties, to aid in all matters pertaining to the improvement of the administration of justice, including all matters that may advance the professional interests of the members of the State Bar. Existing law requires the State Bar to issue an Annual Discipline Report describing the performance and condition of the State Bar discipline system. Existing law requires the report to cover the previous calendar year and to include accurate and complete descriptions of, among other things, the existing backlog of cases within the discipline system and a description of the programs at the State Bar directed at preventing acts warranting discipline. Existing law requires the board to appoint a lawyer admitted to practice in California to serve as chief trial counsel. The Office of the Chief Trial Counsel, which is responsible for reviewing charges of lawyer misconduct, investigates and prosecutes complaints about attorneys. This bill would revise the content of the information in the report. The bill would additionally require the backlog of cases to include other matters opened in the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel and pending beyond 6 months after receipt, as specified. Existing law, until January 1, 2016, requires the board to charge an annual membership fee for active members of up to $315 for 2015. This bill would, until January 1, 2017, require the board to charge that annual membership fee for 2016. Existing law requires the State Bar to review its workload standards to measure the effectiveness and efficiency of its disciplinary activities, including, but not limited to, the State Bar Court and the Client Security Fund, and to provide guidance to the State Bar and the Legislature in allocating resources, as specified. This bill would delete that requirement. The bill would, instead, require the State Bar to develop and implement a specified workforce plan for its discipline system and conduct a public sector compensation and benefits study to reassess the numbers and classifications of staff required to conduct the disciplinary activities. The bill would require the State Bar to conduct a thorough analysis of its operating costs and develop a spending plan to determine a reasonable amount for the annual membership fee, as specified. The bill would require the State Bar to report to the Legislature by May 15, 2016. Existing law requires the board to engage the services of an independent public accounting firm for an audit of its financial statement for each fiscal year. This bill would require, effective January 1, 2016, the State Bar to contract with the California State Auditor's Office to conduct an in-depth financial audit of the State Bar, including an audit of its financial statement, internal controls, and relevant management practices, as provided, and would require the office to provide a copy of the audit to the board, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and to the Assembly and Senate Committees on Judiciary. Under existing law, no law of this state restricting or prescribing a mode of procedure for the exercise of powers of state public bodies or state agencies is applicable to the State Bar, unless the Legislature expressly so declares. Except as specified, existing law requires every meeting of the board to be open to the public. Existing law, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, requires that all meetings of a state body be open and public and that all persons be permitted to attend any meeting of a state body, subject to certain conditions and exceptions. A violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. Existing law exempts the board from the act, but requires the board to ensure that its open meeting requirements are consistent with, and conform to, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act. Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires state and local agencies to make public records available for inspection, subject to certain exceptions. This bill, commencing April 1, 2016, would make the State Bar subject to the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act. The bill would provide that the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act does not apply to the Judicial Nominees Evaluation Commission or the Committee of Bar Examiners. By expanding the scope of that crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also make the State Bar subject to the California Public Records Act. The bill would require any identifying information submitted by an applicant to the State Bar for admission and a license to practice law and all State Bar admission records to be confidential and would prohibit disclosure pursuant to any state law, including the California Public Records Act. The bill would make other conforming changes in this regard. This bill would incorporate additional changes in Section 11121 of the Government Code proposed by AB 85 that would become operative only if AB 85 and this bill are both chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2016, and this bill is chaptered last. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.